apl.36.17.jud.doc 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
CRIMINAL APPLICATION [APL] NO.36 OF 2017
Mohd. Muzammil Raghib s/o Mohd. Ajmal Raghib,
Age 26 years, Occ. : Private,
R/o. Bhaji Mandi, Kamptee, District Nagpur. ..... Applicant
--- Versus --
1] State of Maharashtra,
through P.S.O., P.S. Juni Kamptee,
Nagpur.
2] Shabanam Qureshi d/o Haji Vahab Qureshi,
Age 27 years, Occ. Household,
R/o Bhaji Mandi Qureshi Nagar,
Near Chodharik Masjid, Kamptee,
District Nagpur. ..... Non-Applicants
--------------------
Ms. Rohini Khapekar, Advocate for the Applicant.
Ms. N.P. Mehta, A.P.P. for Non-Applicant No.1.
Shri A.I. Nayak, Advocate for Non-Applicant No.2.
-------------------
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT :- (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. ::: Uploaded on - 29/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/03/2017 00:32:09 ::: apl.36.17.jud.doc 2 02] By way of present application, the applicant has approached this Court with a prayer for quashing and setting aside the first information report arising out of the complaint lodged by non-applicant No.2 against him vide Crime No.210/2016 with the Police Station Juni Kamptee, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. 03] Upon perusal of the first information report would reveal that the report is lodged by non-applicant no.2 stating therein that she was married to one Nazir Ahmed Qureshi in the year 2006 and one son is also begotten from their relationship. In the year 2013, she was divorced by said Nazir Ahmed Qureshi and since then, she along with his son is residing at Kamptee.
It is further stated in the F.I.R. that in the month of November, 2014, when the first informant had gone to a mobile shop for recharging her mobile, the applicant, who was present at the mobile shop, had noted her mobile number and after she leaving the mobile shop, he made a phone call on her mobile and expressed his interest in her. It is further stated in the report that despite of the first informant informed that she is a ::: Uploaded on - 29/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/03/2017 00:32:09 ::: apl.36.17.jud.doc 3 divorcée, the applicant insisted her and still shown his interest in her. It is also stated that the relationship was developed between them and thereafter they used to meet each other in an empty house of the father of the applicant. It is further stated that in the month of November, 2015, on the false pretext that applicant would marry her, the applicant forced the first informant to have a physical relationship with her and thereafter he developed physical relations with her. However, after 16 th September, 2016, the applicant stopped contacting the first informant.
04] However, it appears that after lodging of the F.I.R., matter has been amicably settled. The parties have married to each other and are residing together. A copy of "Nikah Nama" as well as the photograph of the marriage are placed on record. 05] The applicant as well as non-applicant no.2 are personally present in the Court. They reiterate that the matter has been amicably settled between them and they are residing together.
::: Uploaded on - 29/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/03/2017 00:32:09 ::: apl.36.17.jud.doc 4 06] The Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 has held that if the matrimonial dispute has been settled between the parties, this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash and give an end to the criminal proceedings.
07] In that view of the matter, we find that continuation of the criminal proceedings would unnecessary come in the way of peaceful married life of the parties. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the present case is a fit case where this Court can exercise powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code and give an end to the criminal proceedings. Hence, the application deserves to be allowed.
08] The application is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (1).
(Kum. Indira Jain, J.) (B.R. Gavai, J)
*sdw
::: Uploaded on - 29/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 30/03/2017 00:32:09 :::